Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

The Minister indicated at the start of the debate that he would listen to Deputies and in fairness to him he has done so. In re-examining the section I ask him to consider a number of cases other than the two I cited to highlight the issue of proportionality and demonstrate that penalties should not be arbitrary. Other circumstances must be taken into account to ensure we do not fill more jails. We will probably need three or four prisons of the size proposed for the Thornton Hall site if the section is enacted.

As I stated, this legislation is being rushed. It is crazy that at this point, to all intents the concluding Stage of the Bill, it is proposed to remove or substantially change a section. My opposition to mandatory sentences has not changed but at least if the Minister were to proceed in the manner he has suggested, the legislation might become more measured and focused, which is his stated intention.

If the section enters into force, will it operate retrospectively? Will it affect those who have been sentenced for the crimes to be listed in the Schedule? If so, will it be necessary to make all such persons aware that circumstances have changed and they will face a different, substantial penalty if they engage in the types of activity cited in the legislation? It should be noted that such persons face stiff penalties as matters stand. The difference is that sentences would be predetermined. The Garda and the Courts Service should be able to bear this out. People who are caught for a second offence are often more susceptible to turning State's evidence against fellow gang members to avoid prison. In that instance, there is no incentive if it is stated in the Bill that one must serve three quarters of the maximum for a second offence. We need to be careful we do not prevent somebody from getting a conscience or at the least from being too afraid to go to jail for a second time. Information from such a person would be liable to help us prevent further crime.

The DPP would probably have to weigh this up but if we are too prescriptive, certain matters would be prevented by such black and white legislation. I thank the Minister for at least reconsidering the section. We can come back to it.

See this speech in context